Aṅguttara Nikāya · Discourse 4.18

Prejudice (2nd)

Dutiyaagatisutta — Caravagga — the second chapter of the Fours

Setting
None stated; the Caravagga gives no location, and each discourse is addressed to the mendicants directly
Speakers
The Buddha alone, addressing the mendicants
Form
The same four in the negative, and one verse
Length
under a minute to read
Northern parallel
As with AN 4.17, the four agati are widespread in the Chinese Āgamas; this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — the mirror of the previous discourse, and its whole interest is in being a mirror

Why this discourse

The same four terms, negated: decisions unprejudiced by favoritism, hostility, stupidity, and cowardice, and a reputation that swells like the waxing moon. On its own the discourse adds nothing to AN 4.17, and saying so is not a criticism — the pairing is the collection’s method, and what it is for is worth understanding.

Reading guide

The teaching in one sentence

The four ways a decision goes wrong, stated as the four ways it can be sound.

Why the mirror exists

The Aṅguttara pairs discourses like this constantly, and it is not filler. Two things are accomplished.

First, the negative form gives the practitioner something to do. A list of four faults tells you what to avoid; the same list negated tells you what a good decision looks like from the inside — and those are different mental operations. A person checking themselves for favoritism is doing something other than a person aiming at impartiality.

Second, it makes the pair recitable. In an oral collection the negative and the positive form a matched unit, and the reciter who has one has the other. This is the same economy visible in AN 4.11 and 4.12, and in AN 4.3 and 4.4.

The waxing moon

AN 4.17’s waning moon and this discourse’s waxing one are one image split across two texts. The verse says that one who does not act against the teaching in these four ways has their fame swell, like the moon in the waxing fortnight.

The observation embedded in the image is worth stating. Reputation for fairness is not made by a single decision, any more than the moon fills in a night. It accumulates through a sequence of small, individually unremarkable decisions in which nothing improper happened. That is why it is slow to build and, in the waning version, slow but steady to lose.

It is also a notably modest promise. The discourse does not offer heaven, attainment, or the ending of suffering for making decisions well. It offers a reputation. For a collection frequently accused of promising too much, this is a discourse that promises exactly what the conduct in question actually produces.

Fame as a criterion

Yaso, the word rendered ‘fame’, covers reputation, standing, and renown — and the collection is elsewhere sharply suspicious of it. Gain, honor, and praise are named repeatedly as dangers.

There is no contradiction, but the distinction is worth drawing for students. What is dangerous is wanting fame and being changed by it. What this discourse describes is fame as an indicator: the visible consequence of a long run of sound decisions, reported from the outside. The verse tells you what happens, not what to aim at.

Using the negative form

Practically, this is the version to hand to someone who holds an office. Read as questions the four become a checklist that can be run before a decision rather than after it: Am I deciding this because of who they are to me? Because of a grudge? Have I actually understood the case? Am I avoiding a cost to myself?

AN 4.17 diagnoses; AN 4.18 prompts. That is the practical difference between a list of faults and its negation, and it is why the collection bothers to give both.

Key terms

agati — “prejudice”, literally a wrong course — here negated: decisions that do not depart from the proper route.
yaso — “fame, reputation, standing” — what swells. Elsewhere the collection is suspicious of it; here it is an indicator rather than a goal.
chanda — “preference, favoritism” — the first of the four, negated. Not deciding for someone because they are yours.
bhaya — “fear, cowardice” — the fourth, negated. Not deciding so as to avoid a cost to oneself.
sukkapakkha — “the bright fortnight” — the waxing half of the lunar month, against AN 4.17’s dark fortnight.

The text

The discourse in full: the four negated, and the verse. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

Four unprejudiced decisions

§1“Mendicants, there are these four ways of making unprejudiced decisions. What four? Making decisions unprejudiced by favoritism, hostility, stupidity, and cowardice. These are the four ways of making unprejudiced decisions.

The verse

§2If you don’t act against the teaching out of favoritism, hostility, cowardice, and stupidity, your fame swells, like the moon in the waxing fortnight.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 10
What does AN 4.18 state?
Correct: B. Its whole interest is in being a mirror.
Question 2 of 10
What is the first thing the mirror accomplishes?
Correct: B. Checking for favoritism and aiming at impartiality are different mental operations.
Question 3 of 10
What is the second?
Correct: B. The same economy visible in AN 4.11 and 4.12.
Question 4 of 10
What is the image in this verse?
Correct: B. One image split across two texts with AN 4.17.
Question 5 of 10
What observation does the guide draw from it?
Correct: B. Slow to build, and slow but steady to lose.
Question 6 of 10
What does the discourse promise for deciding well?
Correct: B. A notably modest promise, and exactly what the conduct produces.
Question 7 of 10
How does this square with the collection’s suspicion of fame?
Correct: B. The verse tells you what happens, not what to aim at.
Question 8 of 10
What does yaso cover?
Correct: B. Named elsewhere alongside gain and honor as a danger.
Question 9 of 10
How does the guide suggest using the negative form?
Correct: B. Am I deciding this because of who they are to me? Because of a grudge? Have I understood the case? Am I avoiding a cost?
Question 10 of 10
What is the practical difference between AN 4.17 and AN 4.18?
Correct: B. Which is why the collection bothers to give both.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0